[wp_tech_share]

The broadband industry’s relentless march toward multi-gigabit speeds is hitting a wall—not a technical one, but a practical one. As we look toward 2026, the competitive battleground is shifting from headline speeds to experiential quality. Operators across fiber, cable, FWA, and LEO satellite are recognizing that reducing latency, minimizing jitter, and ensuring rock-solid reliability matter more to customer satisfaction than offering 2, 5, or even 10 Gbps services that customers neither need nor fully utilize.

Let’s start by taking a look at the specific technologies and operator implementations that will fuel the drive towards better broadband:

  • XGS-PON and Beyond: Latency Takes Center Stage:

    While the industry continues its migration from GPON to XGS-PON, the focus has shifted from the 10G headline number to the latency improvements these platforms enable. Modern XGS-PON deployments are achieving sub-5ms latency consistently, with operators like AT&T leveraging dynamic bandwidth allocation to minimize jitter for latency-sensitive applications. The real innovation isn’t the speed—it’s the intelligence baked into these platforms that enables real-time traffic prioritization and quality assurance. This quality-first approach is fundamentally reshaping PON roadmaps, pushing large-scale 50G PON adoption out by 3-5 years as operators instead invest in XGS-PON enhancements that deliver immediate quality improvements. Cooperative DBA (Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation), low-latency scheduling, and time-sensitive networking (TSN) features provide tangible benefits and competitive advantages today.

  •  Edge Computing and CDN Proliferation:

    The push toward edge computing is fundamentally reshaping broadband access network architectures. Comcast’s deployment of vCMTS pods throughout its footprint exemplifies this trend, bringing content and compute functions within 10-20 miles of end users. This isn’t about bandwidth—it’s about ensuring that cloud gaming, AR/VR applications, and real-time collaboration tools perform flawlessly regardless of peak usage times. It is also about accommodating shifting traffic patterns and priorities on a per-service group and per-customer basis. No one knows the potential impact that agentic AI will have on potential bandwidth utilization. In fact, it is likely to have little impact on total bandwidth consumed. Instead, the likely scenario is that real-time responses and interactions will become the norm and the expectations of all broadband users. Ensuring that level of performance is again far more about latency, jitter, and other traffic characteristics than it is about sheer throughput.

  • Network Slicing and Service Differentiation:

    5G’s network slicing concept is now migrating to fixed broadband networks and services. Charter and other operators are experimenting with virtual network slices that guarantee specific latency and jitter parameters for different service tiers—not faster speeds, but guaranteed performance for work-from-home, gaming, or healthcare applications. In this context, network slicing goes way beyond traditional policy enforcement. Instead, the focus here is on creating a virtual, dedicated network within your existing hardware and software resources, as well as your spectrum and wavelengths. GFiber and Nokia demonstrated a proof-of-concept whereby network congestion was simulated on a residential Wi-Fi network that resulted in significant lag and pixelation  for online gamers. A dedicated, on-demand network slice was established from the Wi-Fi gateway all the way to the core of the network, which alleviated the performance issues for the gamers. While the technology is certainly available to take this from a POC to a live service, the bigger question for operators is how (and if) they can monetize this service. Or perhaps it simply becomes an expected feature of all broadband networks, as its goal is to improve the user experience.

  • Wi-Fi 7 and Intelligent Home Networking:

    Speaking of user experience, the home network remains the Achilles’ heel of broadband quality. Wi-Fi 7’s multi-link operation (MLO) and deterministic latency features represent a quantum leap in reliability. But the real game-changer is the intelligence layer operators are adding—AT&T’s Smart Home Manager and Comcast’s xFi platform are evolving from basic management tools to AI-driven optimization engines that proactively identify and resolve issues before customers notice them.

 

But “Better and Bigger” Will Also Be a Major Theme

The emphasis on delivering high-quality and reliable broadband services, as opposed to just faster broadband services, will also underpin another ongoing shift in the market this year. Continued consolidation among broadband providers will deliver improved broadband quality across larger, more unified footprints. Hence, “better and bigger.” With fixed wireless having shown cable’s vulnerability in many major markets, the race is on to expand network footprints while also taking advantage of access and core technologies that improve service quality and reliability over multiple physical layers.

To start off the year, Verizon expects to close on its $20 B acquisition of Frontier in the first quarter of 2026. The imminent transaction isn’t only about adding fiber passings—it’s also about acquiring a mature operation with established network intelligence systems. It took significant time and capital to get Frontier’s network to this point. But it has paid off in improved customer satisfaction and NPS (Net Promoter Score).

Both AT&T and T-Mobile are following similar paths to network expansion, employing multiple buildout strategies incorporating FWA, direct fiber builds, joint venture partnerships, and third-party wholesale arrangements. The operators’ diversified approaches to fiber deployments provide significant competitive advantages. While pure-play fiber companies like Google Fiber focus primarily on high-density markets, and cable companies upgrade existing infrastructure, AT&T and T-Mobile’s multiple models allow them to compete effectively across the entire market spectrum.

This flexibility has become increasingly important as competition intensifies. In markets where Comcast or Charter might have cable infrastructure advantages, AT&T and T-Mobile can leverage joint ventures or wholesale arrangements to maintain competitive presence without overextending capital resources. In rural markets where traditional competitors might not venture, government partnerships and wholesale arrangements enable both operators to capture market share in underserved areas.

Most importantly, with both operators stamping their approval on these networks in the form of their very recognizable and respected brand names, we fully expect that quality and reliability standards enforced across their existing networks and services will be easily transferred to their expanded network footprints.

 

The Impact of SpaceX and Amazon LEO

Of course, any discussion around bigger or better broadband in 2026 must include the budding LEO rivals SpaceX and Amazon. Collectively, both providers are set to receive about 21% of the BEAD location awards, resulting in coverage for approximately 888 K locations across the US. Though the companies are only set to receive about 4% of the $20 B in awards from the BEAD program, the discrepancy in total revenue versus total locations served is the reason why the satellite operators were selected. The average BEAD subsidy for SpaceX runs $500-$2,000 per location, compared to $3,700-$8,600 per location for fiber in the same states. States are making rational economic choices. When you’re connecting 10 homes across 50 square miles of mountainous terrain, the fiber business case collapses.

And now with SpaceX preparing for a massive IPO in 2026 that could value the company at nearly $1.5 trillion, it could very easily expand its Starlink coverage globally, purchase additional spectrum across global markets, and build out an entire, low-Earth orbit AI infrastructure whose scale would be unmatched. Its recent EchoStar spectrum purchase wasn’t just about the immediate direct-to-cell opportunity.  It’s about capturing the entire long tail of connectivity markets where traditional infrastructure economics fail. The BEAD awards validate the model. The carrier partnerships provide distribution. The spectrum enables the product roadmap. Together, they represent competitive repositioning that forces every terrestrial operator to recalculate their rural strategy.

The big question in 2026 and beyond is how Amazon responds. Jeff Bezos has already convinced key terrestrial communications providers that SpaceX shouldn’t be a monopoly, even if Amazon will be playing catch-up in the constellation race. Now, Bezos will have to quicky demonstrate its ability to get satellites in space and services up and running, meeting some stringent quality and reliability requirements established by both NTIA and the individual states.

 

Moving Forward

The “better not bigger” trend represents a maturation of the broadband industry. We’re moving from a “build it and they will come” mentality to a nuanced understanding of what actually drives customer satisfaction and reduces churn. Operators that successfully execute this transition—investing in intelligence, edge computing, and reliability over raw speed—will build sustainable competitive advantages that are much harder to replicate than simply lighting up another fiber wavelength.

As 2026 approaches, expect marketing messages to shift from “up to X Gbps” to “guaranteed performance,” from speed tests to quality scores, and from bandwidth tiers to application-specific assurances. The operators who recognize this shift early and invest accordingly won’t just retain customers—they’ll steal them from competitors still fighting yesterday’s gigabit war.

[wp_tech_share]

The U.S. broadband and mobile market is rapidly evolving, with fixed wireless access (FWA) and MVNO-based mobile plans reshaping competition. Cable operators, once dominant over DSL and limited fiber, are now under pressure from FWA—already serving 13 million users—and expanding FTTH deployments. Despite broadband subscriber losses, major players like Comcast and Charter are seeing strong mobile subscriber growth, helping offset the decline. To stay competitive, operators are adopting aggressive strategies like multi-year price locks, device buyouts, and simplified DIY installations to encourage bundling and reduce churn.

In this insightful article, exclusive contribution to CSI Magazine Broadband Special Edition, Summer 2025, VP Broadband Analyst Jeff Heynen breaks down how convergence and bundling are becoming essential survival strategies.

From multi-play packages and mobile subscriber gains to DOCSIS 4.0 innovations and edge virtualization, Heynen outlines the new architecture shaping the future of cable. Whether you’re an operator, vendor, or strategist, this piece provides a clear view of where the market is headed—and what it takes to stay ahead.

Download the article directly from CSI Magazine’s Summer 2025 digital edition for full analysis:

Key Topics Covered:

  • The impact of mobile subscriber growth on broadband strategy
  • How cable is leveraging Wi-Fi, CBRS, and GAP nodes
  • The role of vCMTS, vBNG, and 5G AGF in future convergence
  • Enhancing customer experience with Wi-Fi 7 and low-latency DOCSIS
  • Cost-effective capacity expansion versus FTTH buildouts

Don’t miss this expert perspective on how cable operators can future-proof their networks in a rapidly converging world!

[wp_tech_share]

Charter’s proposed $34.5 billion acquisition of Cox Communications reflects just how much the US broadband landscape has changed. The near-nationwide availability of fixed wireless access (FWA), combined with expanding fiber footprints, has put cable operators on the defensive as they struggle with net broadband subscriber losses. Back in September 2024, I detailed the situation in a blog titled, “US Telcos Betting on Convergence and Scale to End Cable’s Broadband Reign”:

Going forward, the 1-2 punch of FWA and fiber will allow the largest telcos to have substantially larger broadband footprints than their cable competitors. Combine that with growing ISP relationships with open access providers and these telcos can expand their footprint and potential customer base further. And by expanding further, we don’t just mean total number of homes passed, but also businesses, enterprises, MDUs (multi-dwelling units), and data centers. Fiber footprint is as much about total route miles as it is about total passings. And those total route miles are, once again, increasing in value, after a prolonged slump.

For cable operators to successfully respond, consolidation likely has to be back on the table. The name of the game in the US right now is how to expand the addressable market of subscribers or risk being limited to existing geographic serving areas. Beyond that, continuing to focus on the aggressive bundling of converged services, which certainly has paid dividends in the form of new mobile subscribers.

Beyond that, being able to get to market quickly in new serving areas will be critical. In this time of frenzied buildouts and expansions, the importance of the first mover advantage can not be overstated.

So, maybe the specific combination of Charter and Cox was a surprise. But the notion that cable operators had to fight back by getting bigger was certainly not.

Network Upgrade Plans Likely to Stay the Same

Of course, there is no guarantee that this transaction will ultimately be approved. So, while the trade and legal reviews are getting underway, both operators still face competitors that are likely to accelerate their own marketing and sales initiatives designed to attract subscribers from the latest “corporate behemoth,” which only wants to stamp out competition and raise your broadband and mobile service prices. Charter and Cox, even though they have slightly different access network upgrade plans, will continue along their individual paths to raise speeds and improve signal quality across their HFC plant.

Fortunately, for both operators, the long-term vision of their access networks remains nearly aligned, though the timing might be slightly different. It’s worth a quick look at how Charter and Cox are both similar and different when it comes to their broadband access network strategies:

  • Charter and Cox are moving forward with Distributed Access Architectures (DAA) using vCMTS and Remote PHY Devices. Charter is in the early stages of their RPD deployments, while Cox has converted nearly all of its existing optical node base to Remote PHY. Cox had historically relied on Cisco for its M-CMTS (Modular CMTS) platforms, an early precursor to Remote PHY, and subsequently took the next evolutionary step of homing RPDs to the existing CCAP installed base. While that did allow the operator to move to Ethernet transport between the headend and RPDs, the benefits of moving to a vCMTS architecture weren’t fully realized, which is why Cox is now working with Vecima’s vCMTS platform.
  • Both Charter and Cox believe in using the Extended Spectrum flavor of DOCSIS 4.0, though Charter expects to deploy DOCSIS 4.0 earlier than Cox. This is because Cox is already running the vast majority of its network at 1 GHz with a mid-split architecture, while Charter is in the process of upgrading its usable spectrum from 750 MHz to 1.2 GHz (using 1.8 GHz amplifiers running at 1.2 GHz) using a high-split architecture. According to Charter CEO Chris Winfrey, “In terms of the network, Cox is largely through an upgrade for what we would call a mid-split upgrade…There’s no rush for us to go try to harmonize that into a high split footprint.” Winfrey also said, “In our planning, the eventual conversion to DOCSIS 4.0 with DAA doesn’t take place for years and it’ll be done at a lower cost as a result of them having already completed their mid-split and because of the scale that we’ll have at the time that we’re completing our own DOCSIS 4.0 and DAA upgrades.” In other words, Cox has a longer runway with its current mid-split, 1 GHz architecture delivering 2 Gbps downstream speeds. So, should the merger go through, the Cox systems would be delivering similar downstream speeds as the upgraded Charter systems, but would likely have reduced upstream capacity relative to the upgraded, high-split systems.
  • Charter is also a proponent of GAP (Generic Access Platform) nodes and has begun deploying these modular nodes in its network to replace aging and discontinued units. Cox, on the other hand, has made no mention of GAP nodes and likely doesn’t need to in the short-term, given that it spent a good deal of capex years ago to upgrade to 1 GHz. Even Charter isn’t deploying GAP nodes universally across its network, as it will continue to source GAP and non-GAP nodes from multiple vendors.
  • When it comes to vCMTS, Charter has hinted about having cores from multiple vendors, though to date it has only publicly announced Harmonic as its vCMTS supplier. Meanwhile, Cox just recently announced its selection of Vecima’s Entra vCMTS, which makes sense given the deployment of Vecima RPDs. But Vecima RPDs are also being deployed at Charter. So, does that mean that Vecima stands to win a share of Charter’s vCMTS business, as well? Although RPD and vCMTS interoperability is expected and is in deployment at other operators, Charter has made note of some interoperability challenges within its network. Thus, it utilizes Falcon V as a testbed for vCMTS and RPD interoperability, along with Vecima’s acquisition of Falcon V.
  • When it comes to fiber deployments, Charter and Cox have different technology choices. Charter continues to use 10 Gbps DPoE (DOCSIS Provisioning over EPON) for both its RDOF-funded projects and its Greenfield fiber builds. In contrast, Cox was an early adopter of both GPON and the newer XGS-PON technology. As a result, Cox has a significantly higher percentage of PON (Passive Optical Network) connections compared to Charter in terms of total homes and businesses served.

It goes without saying that there are many variables from a technology perspective surrounding this proposed transaction that are likely to have profound implications on the cable outside plant and headend vendor landscape. The combination of two of the largest cable operators in the world ultimately reduces the number of opportunities for unique vendors, thereby furthering consolidation among those vendors. Should this deal move forward, I fully expect there to be some consolidation among equipment vendors as they look to grow their share at the new combined company.

[wp_tech_share]

Recent shifts in U.S. trade policy, including the implementation and adjustment of tariffs, have introduced uncertainty into global markets. Temporary rollbacks and exceptions—such as reduced rates and product-specific carve-outs—have added to the complexity, particularly in response to market reactions.

As of now, the effective average tariff rate on U.S. imports is estimated at 27%, the highest level since the early 20th century, reflecting broader efforts to recalibrate trade dynamics. Accordingly, a key question from clients remains: how will changing tariff policies affect broadband deployments and the demand for related equipment?

Given the frequent adjustments to trade policy—including recent exemptions for smartphones, consumer electronics, and certain GPUs—it remains challenging to forecast the full extent of the impact on broadband infrastructure in the near term.

What follows are our best estimates as to the impact tariffs will have this year and beyond on the broadband market:

1. In the US, tariffs will have minimal impact on most fiber broadband equipment pricing and deployments.

Key fiber broadband equipment providers in the U.S. have already moved most of their assembly and manufacturing to the U.S. in order to adhere to the BABA (Build America, Buy America) waiver of the NTIA’s BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment) program. Though not all of the products being deployed in broadband access networks have been onshored, the most commonly deployed components—PON OLTs, ONTs, cabinets, and fiber-optic cable—have already been self-certified by the respective vendors and have already seen substantial increases in domestic manufacturing.

Beyond BABA, some major operators have multi-year purchase agreements in place for fiber-optic cabling and connectors that should protect them from any impact of tariffs on the import of silica and other raw materials used in the manufacture of fiber cables. For example, in 2024, AT&T signed a $1 billion multi-year agreement with Corning to ensure a stable supply of fiber cable and connectivity solutions. Originally intended to safeguard against supply shortages, this move now also serves to mitigate the risk of rising component costs.

2. Unlike FTTH, cable outside plant upgrades in support of DOCSIS 4.0 are likely to be impacted.

Commscope, which manufactures amplifiers and outer outside plant components in Mexico, and Teleste, which manufactures amplifiers in Finland, will both be impacted by tariffs at any level. We suspect that these manufacturers are either looking to relocate these facilities or manufacturing to the US or are seeking waivers in order to satisfy growing demand from Comcast, Charter, Cox, and others. The relocation of manufacturing is no trivial task and will introduce shipment delays beyond the inventory both already have in their warehouses. The time it takes to move manufacturing is a primary argument for the more gradual introduction of tariffs as opposed to introduction and implementation on the same day.

Additionally, Vecima Networks, which is delivering GAP (Generic Access Platform) nodes to U.S. operators, has already signaled that tariffs will also be materially significant at any level. The net result for cable operators pursuing DOCSIS 4.0 is additional deployment delays as well as increased equipment prices.

3. Residential Wi-Fi routers will feel an impact.

Just as Wi-Fi vendors are looking to ride the wave of Wi-Fi 7 penetration into more homes and businesses, tariffs at any level will easily increase the retail cost of even the most popular Wi-Fi brands by anywhere from 5 to 15%. China, Taiwan, and Vietnam are the manufacturing sources for the vast majority of these devices and, although these devices have been exempted from the tariffs as of Friday night, the likelihood of those full exemptions remaining is very slim, in our opinion.

 4. Indirect impacts of tariffs and forecast adjustments.

The challenge for all industries now is that they simply cannot unsee what has already happened. The state of economic recovery in many countries and industries was already fragile after dealing with the supply shock of the COVID-19 pandemic, which introduced accelerated levels of inflation that were only exacerbated by government policies designed to stimulate economies. Those macroeconomic challenges were felt acutely in telecom equipment purchasing as service providers overbought capacity in 2022 and early 2023 and then had to focus on drawing down those inventories, putting pressure on their equipment vendors to sustain themselves during the spending slowdown. Just as these businesses are set to rebound and return to more normalized and consistent purchasing levels, tariffs are introduced, making the road to recovery cloudier.

In our January 2025 forecast, we had already reduced our expectations for North American broadband equipment spending from our July 2024 forecasts. These adjustments accounted for moderate tariff increase of 15-30% for imported electronics, semiconductors, and other components from China. However, the broader scope of tariffs, which now includes countries like Vietnam and India, exceeds our initial expectations.

However, the tariffs and their resulting costs passed on to end customers actually play only a small role in the forecast changes. The expectation that the BEAD program would come under review and delay the initiation of select fiber projects also played a role in our forecast reductions. Though we were expecting a very limited amount of BEAD funds to actually flow through to broadband equipment providers in 2025, we did expect to see some in the fourth quarter. Now, we highly doubt any money will be spent on OLTs or ONTs this year, instead pushing the spend well into 2026.

The bigger concern we had going into 2025 was the uncertainty among consumers and businesses alike about what impact the new administration’s policies would have on overall spending and investment patterns. After two years of steady inflation and higher interest rates, US consumer confidence was already trending downward. Consumer debt levels were rising and stubbornly high mortgage rates limited the number of new homes being purchased, as well as overall refinancing. With consumer spending in the US typically 68% of GDP, any further decline in confidence could result in consumers pulling back from spending.

And that is where the maelstrom around tariffs this past week has left consumers very concerned about what the immediate future holds for them. That uncertainty is likely to result in consumers either maintaining their current spend on broadband services or downgrading those services to save some money each month. The combination of consumers managing their communications budgets more tightly, fewer new home purchases, and less moves all means it will be incredibly difficult for broadband providers to continue to grow residential ARPU.

Lack of ARPU growth could result in some delays in planned upgrades from GPON to XGS-PON or from DOCSIS 3.1 to DOCSIS 4.0, for example. But it won’t stop the continued buildout of fiber networks in both greenfield and overbuild scenarios, because those are long-term investments with decades-long returns. Even if the cost to pass and connect homes increases due to tariff-induced price increases, the fiber strategies of major operators including AT&T, Frontier, Lumen, and others aren’t going to change.

Broadband and mobile bundling will undoubtedly accelerate this year as telco and cable operators try to lock in subscribers early with aggressive pricing and incentives on mobile services. Those moves will eat into ARPU growth, as well. But service providers will forgo some margins in the short-term in order to expand their subscriber base when the market volatility subsides.

[wp_tech_share]

Late last week, Vecima Networks announced that it was acquiring Falcon V, a Polish developer of access network orchestration software designed to facilitate the deployment of vendor-agnostic DOCSIS, fiber, and wireless networks. The acquisition will help accelerate Vecima’s Entra vCMTS product development and help the company build closer ties to Charter as the cable operator continues its Distributed Access Architecture (DAA) network transformation. The deal also helps to soothe the sting of Vecima’s unsuccessful bid for the cable assets of Casa Systems, despite establishing itself as the stalking horse bid in the auction.

Falcon V, which originated in 2018 as a joint venture between Liberty Global and equipment supplier Vector Group, received an investment from Charter and Liberty Global in 2021 to focus on developing SDN and NFV solutions to allow for the deployment of open DAA systems. At the time of the investment, Charter was focused on deploying Remote MACPHY technology, as opposed to Comcast and other operators, who were moving forward with Remote PHY. Falcon V was said to be working on software that could accelerate vendor interoperability and help Charter move more quickly in the direction of Flexible MAC Architecture (FMA), which offered the operator far more flexibility in where it could locate the MAC (Media access control) function, be it in nodes, hub sites, headends, or centralized data centers.

But in October 2022, Charter changed direction and moved away from Remote MACPHY toward Remote PHY. That strategic shift left many wondering whether Falcon V would still have a role to play in Charter’s transition to DAA. In actuality, nothing changed much for the software supplier, as it was still focused on developing orchestration software as well as an interop testing suite designed to ensure Charter could have a truly open, vendor-agnostic DAA network.

In March 2023, Charter announced that it had selected Harmonic as a vCMTS and Remote PHY Device (RPD) technology supplier while also selecting Vecima as a supplier of its ERM 3 RPDs, which can be installed in its EN 9000 Generic Access Platform (GAP) nodes, all clearly indicating its commitment to a multi-vendor deployment. Vecima had already been selected as the lead supplier of Remote OLTs (R-OLTs) in Charter’s RDOF network buildouts and is presumably a lead supplier of these platforms in potential non-RDOF deployments, as well.

In September 2023, Vecima also announced it had entered into a warrant agreement with Charter, providing Charter the opportunity to purchase up to 361, 050 shares of Vecima stock through 2031 at a strike price of C$17.09 per warrant. That translates into an agreement of roughly US$4.5M and is dependent on Charter achieving certain spending targets.

So, even before the Falcon V acquisition, the relationship between Vecima and Charter was already strong. The addition of Falcon V and its employee base extends that relationship further into the realms of vCMTS, software orchestration, and DAA interop testing.

 

An Answer to Charter’s Interop Issues?

Back in February 2024, Charter’s Chris Winfrey announced that the start of phase two of its network transformation—the phase focused on RPD and vCMTS deployments—would be delayed from the beginning of the year to late 2024, at best. The culprit? DAA equipment certification delays due to greater-than-expected challenges with interop testing. Though Winfrey didn’t provide specifics on the delays, Charter’s multi-vendor strategy is already ambitious, especially when the company continues to build out RDOF properties with R-OLTs and is also trying to roll out new nodes and amplifiers.

Thus, Vecima’s acquisition of Falcon V could very well have been pushed by Charter as a way to reduce the number of discrete vendors it has to coordinate with as it goes through the interop and homologation process. Charter has already made financial commitments to both vendors, so why not advocate for a marriage to help potentially speed up the DAA rollout process? The double-edged sword of DAA network rollout delays and subscriber losses is beginning to weigh heavily on Charter’s investors. So, anything that its vendor partners can do to solve those issues will certainly be welcomed by the operator.

 

Accelerating Vecima’s vCMTS Development

Beyond tightening its relationship with Charter, the addition of Falcon V’s products, as well as its software development teams will certainly help bring Vecima’s Entra vCMTS platform to market more quickly so that it can compete with Harmonic and Commscope. Though the Falcon V acquisition doesn’t completely make up for missing out on acquiring Casa’s cable assets, including its Axyom vCMTS and vBNG platforms, it does help to add pieces to what is an incredibly complex platform.

Vecima needs to accelerate the time to market of its Entra platform, especially at a customer like Charter, which has said it wants to move forward with a multi-vendor core, not just a multi-vendor PHY layer. While the details of just what a multi-vendor core might look like and how it will benefit Charter with all of the many balls it already has in the air, it certainly represents an opportunity for Vecima to position itself with a major operator that has plans beyond just the upgrade of its HFC network.

Charter likely similarly views the vCMTS as Comcast: As an edge compute platform that will ultimately enable services beyond those in the DOCSIS realm. The first workload after vCMTS is vBNG to support FTTH services and then perhaps an AGF (Access Gateway Function) workload to deliver converged fixed and mobile services over the existing HFC plant. Beyond that, perhaps a truly converged fixed and mobile core.